List of Unsuccessful or Problematic Metadata Value
Translations
Draft
Version Control
Version
Version
No.
Date
1
10-3-05
1.1
31-03-05
Summary of Changes
Introduction to link this to the
report.
Note
Status
Working
draft
This document outlines the unsuccessful or problematic metadata value
translations that occurred for the first iteration of the proof-of-concept prototype.
The document should be read in conjunction with the <hotlink> Proof-of-Concept
Demonstrator Prototype- First Iteration Report <hotlink> which provides the
commentary and discussion about the implications of the unsuccessful metadata
value translations in the evaluation section of the report.
RKMS to AGLS
The following AGLS mandatory elements did not translate successfully from the
recordkeeping to resource discovery/publishing environments:
1. Title
2. Function
3. Date
4. Identifier
5. Publisher
Title
The metadata value in the recordkeeping environment required editing before
satisfying the metadata value requirement for the publishing/resource discovery
environment. The policy document in the recordkeeping environment requires a
unique identifying title distinguishing the final approved version from earlier
unapproved drafts. Further; to satisfy requirements for information/records
retrieval, date of the approved version is also incorporated in the title value.
When the policy is published, the metadata value requirement is the final
publication title as defined by a bibliographic metadata conceptual model.
Function
The metadata value in the recordkeeping environment translated correctly to the
publishing environment; however, different underlying encoding schemes exist
for both environments and it may be coincidental that the translation was
successful.
Date, Identifier & Publisher
Metadata values required in the publishing environment for date, identifier and
publisher were not available in the records management system and therefore
could not be translated. It is expected that this issue can be resolved with a web
content management system that interacts with the records management
system.
The following AGLS optional elements did not translate successfully from the
recordkeeping to resource discovery/publishing environments:
AGLS
ELEMENT
Type
Contributor
Description
COMMENT
Manual editing required
Data not available in records management system but possibly
resolved with a web content management system that interacts
with the records management system.
Manual editing required - Basic information can be derived from
1 of 2
List of Unsuccessful or Problematic Metadata Value
Translations
Draft
Format
Mandate
Relation
Source
file metadata but additional information is needed for a useful
value.
Data not available in records management system but possibly
resolved with a web content management system that interacts
with the records management system.
How relevant is the internal mandate for resource discovery
purposes?
Data not available in records management system but possibly
resolved with a web content management system that interacts
with the records management system.
Data not available in records management system but possibly
resolved with a web content management system that interacts
with the records management system.
RKMS to CRS-Series
The following CRS-Series elements did not translate successfully from the
recordkeeping environment to the archival descriptive environment:
1. Title
1. System of arrangement and control
2. Series Descriptive Note
3. Series Accumulation Date Range
A number of CRS-Series elements are populated manually and cannot be usefully
extracted from the recordkeeping environment based on the limitations of the
sequence of the workflow of the scenario.
Title & System of arrangement and control
The metadata values required for archival description are not readily available
from the metadata attached to the files or documents in the records management
system. It may be possible to derive a title value if sufficient metadata is created
and maintained about the record type in the records management system but this
would require a policy intervention to ensure this outcome.
Series Descriptive Note
The metadata value required for archival description is not readily available from
the metadata attached to the files or documents in the records management
system. It is unlikely that this could be resolved by policy intervention to ensure
this metadata is created in the records management system. This issue arises as
a result of the ‘post hoc’ approach to archival description.
Series Accumulation Date Range
The translation is dependent on the manual crosswalk. That is, it is necessary to
identify which xml records should be subject to the xslt stylesheet. In the
absence of the instruction to identify the correct earliest and latest file in the
series, it would be necessary to adopt the unsustainable approach of scanning
every file in the series to determine the appropriate date range.
2 of 2